Slashdot Mirror
Adobe Says PCs Are Preferred
Father Of Free Choice writes "Abobe has picked Windows as the preferred platform for running Photoshop, After Effects, and Illustrator. I don't know how many Mac people this will upset, but given the large hold Apple has on design pros and film, this seems like a bad move on Adobe's part."
it just shows graphs that say the PC is faster than the mac doing stuff in after effects..and at the end it says, "While the computers used in this study are no longer the fastest in their respective classes, the information is still valid"
------ Work is so much easier when you don't
The images appear to be incorrect.
If you look at the first image, it has two times, 54 seconds and 1 minute 25 seconds. The second time is shown at well over double the length of the first, even though it only took ~50% longer. If you look closely, you will see that 1:25 got placed at 1.25, and 0:54 got placed at 0.54, hence the error.
Any of the images where the minutes are different are going to be skewed a fair amount. The error will decrease as the minute difference increases.
Well, I guess I would have to say that one is more productive within their platform environment of preference in general. Yes, my dual Ghz G4 with Cinema display is not as fast as the P4 system it replaced, but it is generally a much more productive environment in that I can run on one workstation, code originally written for SGI, Office for Mac, Adobe products galore, remote sensing code, the website for our lab etc...etc...etc... and I could not do all of this nearly as well or as easy with the three systems my OS X workstation replaced including an SGI Octane, a Wintel system and an older Mac.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
At the end of the day it's the users who are going to decide what the 'preferred platform' is, and I know that a large proportion of graphic/web designers who could not be separated from their G4s without a crowbar and tub of Vaseline. Whatever Adobe say.
However, does this mean Adobe are going to start favouring Windows in terms of releases and support? I suppose that could make more of a dent . . .
"If being a geek means being passionate about something, then I pity those who aren't geeks." - Pike65
Slap me if I'm being silly, but how much do we know about the internals of these products, and how they're implemented between platforms?
That is, could it be that the Windows Adobe team simply writes better software than the Mac Adobe team? How much of this can be put down to the underlying operating systems on both machines?
Just thoughts
Score:-1, Funny
I love "metric time" as much as the next guy, but I wouldn't trust any review that equates 47 seconds with 0.47 minutes [from the review].
Mark
Please stop pissing us off. You've created products to compete with us in photo management. You've added nonlicensed PDF capabilities to your new OS (which we had to update for OS X!) and you've utterly stolen the video editing market from us - which was quite profitable, despite the absolutely abysmal Premiere.
We will continue to promote PCs as the better machine on our website, despite the fact that we ship for both platforms, because you've stepped on our toes. We recommend you go back to making machines and stop with the polished, useful, FREE software.
Thanks,
Adobe
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
The link doesn't say anything about Adobe preferring one platform over another, in the slightest. It's just some graphs indicating that PCs as a class perform better than macintoshes, which is something that i don't think anyone is denying at this point.
While that kind of does seem like an endorsement of the PC on adobe's part, it also is just good business sense to explain to your customers what hardware your software runs best on.
Speed at raw data-crunching is just one of the factors in which computing platform you are going to use, though if you're using AfterEffects or Photoshop or something it's going to be a much, much larger factor.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
man, that is just completely untrue. We run a shop of 20 macs and 10 PC's. Top end G4's and reasonably fast piii's. The differences in rendering complex filters is virtually nonexistent.
The differences in interface: negligible.
The differences in speed: imperceptible.
The differences in cost: the pc's are cheaper.
Which do you think we are buying more of next year?
Our ENTIRE business rides on our ability to turn high end photoretouching (PS) and layout and design (AI). And there is no longer a big enough difference between macs and PC's to warrant the cost diff on our budget.
All of our PC users were forced onto their PC's having been hardcore mac users. They complained, they spent a week getting into "natural" mode with XP, and then no problems at all. Two of them are looking at upgrading their apples and they are looking at the new line of Vaio's.
Adobe is just using the superior metric system, which has 100 seconds / minute.
I guess those Adobe folks are on crack... have you seen PS run on a Mac vs Windows??? It is SO much faster doing nearly all filters. The 3rd party ones even show considerable differences. - RR
;).
In fact, I have. In addition to systems administration, I've also worked as a professional graphic designer (and sometimes still do for side cash). And pound-for-pound, the newest versions of Photoshop run better and faster on Windows than on Macintosh.
Personally, I find myself more and more using The GIMP on Linux because it's faster than Photoshop on *any* platform (and it's open source
My journal has hot
Ok, so the Slashdot take is a bit sensational, and not fact-heavy, but Adobe does have a rather strong hold on the Mac-using image and publishing market. It seems to me that there's only a few things that have to happen for The Gimp to all but replace Photoshop for this purpose. All it really needs is some company to come along and give it a) plugins for dealing with patented color-management for ready-for-print applications (no problem as plugins with licensing, as long as you pay Adobe and the few other companies a royalty) and b) a Mac-native UI that fixes some of the basic brokenness of The Gimp's poor UI choices (e.g. the nearly un-navigatable menus).
Both of these tasks are many orders of magnitude smaller than rolling your own Photoshop replacement, and The Gimp has a far more flexible plugin architecture and tons of people who are happy to write plugins in C, scheme, Perl, Python and other languages!
Anyone have the money to kick something like this off? Consider this you Make Money Fast wakeup call!
And, if you need more of a push... there's CinePaint (ne "Film Gimp"), which you could integrate into your product and add a whole other market.
I'm not so sure. Professionals choose the platform based on software, not the other way round. Switching to PC does give a lower total cost of ownership if Adobe keeps their prices the same, but if the other tools that people want are available only for Mac, then they will choose mac.
I've been using Photoshop for . . .um . . . about eight years now. Initially, all I used it on was a Mac, because quite frankly, Photoshop for Windows in 1995 was a gross, nasty piece of software.
.things I'm not even sure I can call to mind - the way menus lay out, the lack of some standardized interface items (like a save button) . . .have always left me feeling like the PC version of Photoshop and other Adobe apps are kind of afterthoughts - that Adobe must view the Mac version as the REAL version, and the Windows version as the weaker sister.
For reasons mostly related to my profession (Landscape Architect, at the time), I switched to a PC, and began the task of using Photoshop in a Windows environment. At the time, version 3.0 or so was getting better, but still pretty nasty. Now we're up to 7.0, and it is a remarkably better piece of software. I love it. I now do 3D work and image editing, and Photoshop work probably comprises 25% of my time. I'm extremely happy with it, as I am with the copies of Premiere, Pagemaker, and Illustrator that I use in the course of my work, as well.
That being said, I have never been able to escape the notion that it has seemed that Adobe has never quite gotten the knack of porting the software over to the PC. Granted, it runs like a champ, but just little things . .
I fight this battle with my cluster of close friends, most of whom are designer types, about once every three months. I think I've finally got them convinced that you CAN run Photoshop and Illustrator on a PC. For years, they assumed that you couldn't. But that opens up a whole different can of worms that I'm not even going go get into. Use what you want.
So, I'd say this is a surprising development, given my experience with Adobe software over the years.
anything i tell you will cloud your opinion.
"We were using Motorola processors, and all. And then, like, they stopped improving them and stuff. We were like, Huh??
We had to tell our customers that, you know, 3X the clock speed was only a myth. But they weren't trying to hear that.
That sucked.
Then we, like, lost our market share, and stuff... It was good market share.
Bummer.
My name is Steve Jobs, and I switched to X86."
As a professional graphic artist who uses Adobe products on both platforms, I'm not quite sure I agree with the findings of the author. I always find benchmark results from either side to be suspect. I judge by user experience. I find that my results are better, and much easier to achieve, on either of my Macs. I have grown to accept Windows as a sometimes necessary evil, and am quite functional with it. However, and maybe some of you out there have noticed this, tools in Photoshop seem to work much more reliably on the Mac. For instance... color correction, minor adjustments to position, hotkeys, and anything done freehand seem to work less consistently in the Windows version. Strange stuttering, having to hit hotkeys twice, taking forever to place items exactly where you want them... these add up in a business where you are constantly playing beat the clock. Now, before you all start flaming me about being a newbie, or checking my manuals, getting a new keyboard... I have been using Photoshop since the beta for version 2, and Premeire since the very first betas. I've been making a living with CGI for over 12 years. Again, this is my experience with these products, YMMV. I suggest that Adobe is promoting stories like this to teach Apple a lesson. Apple has really put the hurt on Adobe with Final Cut Pro, and with their purchase of several other effects software companies, will soon start to hurt sales of After Effects. This is not to say that Adobe's products are inferior... I think they got lazy with their stranglehold on the market, and don't appreciate Apple filling the gap. What they should be doing is making better products for Mac users. We are largely responsible for supporting them up to this point, and would continue to do so if they kept up the good work. Taking so long to get Photoshop for OSX out did not make them any friends, and suggesting that they were going to stop releasing Premeire for the Mac didn't help either. Ask any of the "Mac Faithful"... Adobe runs a close second as a company that we would break a bottle on the edge of the bar and cut you for badmouthing. Bottom line: their Mac products are slipping, but in general still (IMHO) get the job done better. Let the flames begin...
Someday a real rain is gonna come...
First off, the slashdot article is misleading. The link is for a page on adobe's site about a study done by somebody else on which is faster PC or mac and what somebody else recommends, it's not about which adobe recommends. I mean if Adobe had a note next to Photoshop's minimum requirements saying that PCs are recommended this might be interesting but simply putting up a summary about an article which talks about which is faster is really a much more ambiguous move. We cannot draw from it, for instance, the conclusion that Adobe is gearing up to drop the mac. Nor can we gather that Adobe is no longer investing as many resources in the Mac version. If anything, the only thing we can draw from it is that Adobe is aware that the latest G4 macs are not as fast as their PC counterparts, which I would assume they would know about anyway.
:-)...
Here's the parent link on adobe's site.
Quote::
Is it only me, or isn't ironic that they move now when UNIX (include MacOS X) is gaining ground at all fronts including the desktop users.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
While the Mac is attracting a record number of new users to the platform it is also loosing its established niches and customers. Apple's share in education, for instance, has gone from 50-60% to about 20% under jobs. Apple is also loosing quite a few customers in pre-press although I don't have any numbers on that. I think it is also telling that while Steve has shown in previous macworld keynotes that that the number of new users to the platform has gone from ~10% to 25-30%, Apple's market share is stagnant or decreasing and PC sales are flat which implies that for every new user to the platform Apple is loosing an established user.
What I believe is happening is that Apple is loosing market niches in which it has gained a sizable number of Early Majority users (as defined in Geoffrey A Moore's "Crossing the Chasm") and trading them for early adopter type users in other market segments. This does not bode well as it implies Steve has absolutely no idea how to market to an established user base. Since going from the initial inroads to niche market domination is the hard part, Apple's decline implies that it's quite possible that Apple will never, under Steve, gain enough market presence under in any niche to control it properly. If you have 10% of every market you're not important in any of them and you will be marginalized in all of them.
This definitely matches my experience. I was once a rabid Mac fan, however both the iMac and MacOS X did not present any obvious upgrade path to me since the iMac and ilk broke compatibility will all my peripherals and MacOS X did not leverage any of the knowledge I had acquired in using and debugging the MacOS. Oddly enough, it was easier for me to switch to the PC since my peripherals we're all PC Mac compatible and Windows was at least as Mac like as MacOS X.. and of course everything was cheaper. So I went with a new PC and have been quite pleased with it. This situation is typical when an established market is not presented with an obvious upgrade strategy.
Oddly enough Steve is quite good at setting up situations where he *could* dominate a niche. Like at the moment he looks to be going after the consumer market and the Unix market (quite a spread!). The thing is, as soon as he gets anywhere, I think he'll get bored and abandon the niches and move on to some other interesting niche technology. I seem to remember it was this type of mentality that got him fired from Apple in the first place
As both a computer and graphic arts professional. One's choice of imaging platform boils down to workflow and the Wintel platform is just not there yet. I use Photoshop 7 on both the Mac and WinXP platforms and yes Photoshop renders more quickly on the WinXP it is useless for finished work because of the virtual nonexistance of Color management for the PC platform. On the MAC calibration is easy so the Pantone (tm) color you see on the monitor is what comes off your proof printer and eventually comes off the phototypesetter. There are far more people with digital cameras and scanners on the PC platform BUT for professional use the Mac is the preferred platform due to the tight integration of color management into it's OS's whereas Wintel thinks color management is a add-on product and the results reflect this view
I'm making an exception this time because I can save a lot of people time before they delve into the over 500 posts of reaction to this story (at least for those who read /. in threaded mode).
Adobe is not expressing a preference for Windows PC's
The linked page is called "pcprefered.html" because it is the page which is brought up on the Adobe Digital Video Products page when you click on a link that says: "Prefer a PC for DV? See what an industry expert has to say about PC vs. Mac for video editing."
In other words, those who followed the link from The Adobe DV Products Page are indicating a preference for PC's. Since it's a page for those who prefer PC's, it's called "pcprefered.html".
There is nothing in the body of the page to indicate that Adobe has any preference for PC's, reccomends PC's over Macs, or even likes PC's. The page is a mirror of some Dell vs. Mac speed tests that some guy did. That is all.
By deep-linking to this page out of context, the person who submitted this was obviously trolling... perhaps hoping that the article would not go up until a little closer to April 1.
You may now safely ignore all of the responses below and move on with your life. No need to mod up this post, I'm already posting it at 2. Save your mod points for a real article.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.